EDIT: To Mystic's point, I don't disagree that Marijuana is harmful to one's health, but so is alcohol, and that's completely legal. Overeating is harmful to one's health and the state of being overweight probably has negative psychological associations, that doesn't mean we should control behavior in those people. I just don't see how a free society has any business controlling behaviors that do not hurt anyone but the individual partaking in them.

Unless we go with Trieste's (interesting, though likely flawed somehow) scenario of legal 'drug clinics' where you can get high under controlled and monitored conditions, many of the nastier drugs are in a different category than overeating because they have an excellent chance of hurting people other than the users. Methamphetamines, PCP, and crack cocaine all have euphoric states, disorientation, or outright temporary psychosis as direct or side effects, which can make their partakers threatening to innocent bystanders.

So kinda like cigarettes and nicotine, eh? Yeah, nicotine addiction is just as devastating, yet they are perfectly legal.

Nicotine abuse has no psychological effects beyond dependency; there is no increased risk of psychiatric complication. The problem with cigarette consumption is in inhalation of partial-combusted hydrocarbons and benzeen rings - what we can carcinogens.

The resulting burden on society is so high when it comes to medical care that they should be taxed into oblivion. Indeed, if the social cost of alcohol, cigarettes, and so on were taken into account, then they'd be far more expensive.

Besides, argument by analogy is always a poor substitute to proper argumentation. They let you kill people during war, so we should always be able to kill people.

The 'burden on society' argument is invalid unless you choose to punish other lifestyle choices that will lead to extensive medical care.

ObesityDiabetics who don't take their medication or eat correctlyMotorcyclists who don't wear a helmet

And so on.

... which strikes me as very 1984, and quite horrifying.

Or if you have a national healthcare system in which tax expenditure goes to provide medical care. In such situations I think it is entirely warranted that you pay an increased contribution if you are an increased burden.

Edit: An increased burden by your conscious and deliberate acts or omissions.

The whole point of nationalized healthcare is to make sure that the populace receives the care that they need but which they cannot afford. Taxing the holy hell out of people because they choose a lifestyle - a legal one - that is not popular is essentially coercing those people to make the 'correct' choices despite being within their legal rights to choose otherwise. It's racketeering: you make the choices I want you to make or you pay the hefty price.

No.

If cigarettes place an undue burden on the healthcare system (or on society), then gather the oomph to make them illegal. If alcohol does the same, gather the support to make it illegal. (Oh, wait, we tried that. How'd that turn out, again?) It's the same with any drug, any poison, any leisure activity. Is there a skydiving tax? "Bad example," you say, "because skydivers are supposed to use parachutes and not die." Okay, then - what about a failed-suicide tax? If someone tried to kill themselves and failed, they have made personal choices that place an avoidable burden on the healthcare system. But it's almost unthinkable to tax someone like that.

It's not a case of "Well, I'm trying to keep an eye out for the healthcare system". It's "Well, I don't think this is acceptable, and I don't want my tax dollars going for this, so clearly this person should pay a whole lot of taxes to assuage my indignation over it". And that is wrong.

Edit: It's been kindly pointed out to me that I've gotten off on a bit of a tangent, which I didn't mean to do. Gonna bow out now, with my apologies. ^^

People who live unhealthy lifestyles are an increased burden on the healthcare system -- and?

People who drive are an increased burden on their local roadways. Truckers are an increased burden on the national interstate system. Shall we set up taxes penalizing them for the way they live? Should people who choose not to drive pay a lot less? Hey, what about carbon emissions, shall we start taxing people based on their carbon footprint? How about people who choose to live in dangerous neighborhoods as they're likely to need police services. Lets tax people who are poorly educated as well because they're more likely to commit crimes against society and receive welfare which costs us all.

Government services never benefit society equally. It would be impossible, and probably not even ideal, to create a society where they would be equal. And when you start penalizing individuals for how they inadvertently affect the whole, you create a group-think society that chains down the individual to unintentional consequences in the name of protecting the greater society.

I value personal freedom too much to buy into that. I think that the society as a whole can sustain the cost of an individual's actions a bit here and there, since it asks so much of individuals to begin with in the social contract itself, a little give and take would be nice.

Apparently, it's because of having something non-edible artificially enclosed in a food item that isn't actually used in consuming it (popsicle or lollipop sticks are exempt as a result of being 'handles', fruit seeds and meat bones are naturally enclosed in their respective food items).

Well, I know that's why they don't allow them to be sold in the U.S. but I would think they'd allow it across the border. I mean, unless you've loaded your pickup truck with nothing but Kender goodness.

I remember Kender eggs...when I was younger, my father (commercial pilot) would bring them home after every trip as presents for the kids, and he never had a problem with customs. I built up quite a collection of those little toys...

I'm still building my collection :) It's my fave chocolate treat. I lknow it's meant for kids but they are really good. Oh! I'd also like to make pot legal so that government can tax the hell out of all the pot head losers who do it. And to put some money into the Canadian economy.